Home › Blogs › Wyatt Taylor's blog ›

Give Me More DeMints and Coburns

Submitted by Wyatt Taylor on Tue, 07/28/2009 - 08:53
in

"We got too many Jim DeMints and Tom Coburns," Sen. George Voinovich (R-Ohio) told the Columbus Dispatch. "It's the southerners."

I say give me a dozen more Jim DeMints or Tom Coburns and I'll give you healthcare reform that works.  I'll give you economic policies that free up the wealth creating energy of the American people and rocket us into recovery.  If only we had a few more of those guys...

5
Your rating: None Average: 5 (1 vote)

Comments

OK

Submitted by tdawg11870 on Tue, 07/28/2009 - 09:57.

Then find me some more states that would be willing to vote for another DeMint or Coburn. 

 

In my ideal world, the Senate would be composed of 100 people who thought exactly as I did, efficiently enacting all of my preferred policies.  Unfortunately, I can't get everyone to agree with me, nor can anyone else. 

Sure, but...

Submitted by Wyatt Taylor on Tue, 07/28/2009 - 10:33.

tdawg11870,

I agree we certainly have a dearth of Red states these days too, but I tend to think a lot of the problem is that we don't have enough DeMints and Coburns to fill solid Red state senate seats.  So we end up with squishes in states where you don't necessary have to be a squish to win.  My real point, however, was not to get into the moderate/conservative party turf war, but to speak to the senators' ability to project a strong voice and leadership on an issue like healthcare.  My senior senator is a great example of this: Mitch McConnell, while a deft and capable backroom dealer for the party, is no communicator or leader on issues like this.  Thus, he is forced to follow the tide of public opinion, instead of leading public opinion where it needs to go. 

PS - Thanks for reading the blog! 

Who are the squishes?

Submitted by tdawg11870 on Tue, 07/28/2009 - 11:35.

I don't really see any evidence that either DeMint or Coburn are moving the debate.  I also don't see many squishes in states that could handle a harder-right Senator.  Grassley?  Iowa has been trending Dem for ages.  The Mainers? If either retired, they would be replaced by either a Dem or a Republican of the same stripe.  Lugar?  Indiana is a lot more wobbly than it used to be.  McCain?  The demographics of AZ are changing and it's no sure thing.  Besides, he seems fairly quiet on health care.  Voinovich, of course, is saying these things because he's out the door anyway.

The big problem with the conservative movement is the idea that the ideas are unpopular only because they aren't explained well enough.  If only we had better public speakers, I hear.  If only we got through to young people on Twitter, I hear.  The problem with this way of thinking is that it absolves the people who are saying it of any examination of what they advocate. 

The cult of Reagan worship has frozen the party in 1980, when the Soviet Union existed, the top tax rate was over 80%, nobody had heard of the term "pre-existing condition" and gays were thought of as a perverse curiosity.  The youngest people to see Reagan on a ballot, those aged 18 in 1984, are 43 now.  The issues have changed - instead of getting frustrated over Mitch McConnell's speaking style, we should be thinking up small-government solutions to climate change, health care, education costs and the rest that amount to more than denying the problem exists.

The Republican Recipe...

Submitted by Wyatt Taylor on Tue, 07/28/2009 - 15:02.

On your first point, are DeMint and Coburn moving the debate - fair enough, maybe they aren't.  But the debate is moving.  What is moving the debate is not Republicans coming up with some fancy new policy, it's opposing the crazy liberal one.  So I'm not sure that supports your last point. 

On your second, where the squishes are, fair enough.  It's probably easier to spot some in the House, but even so that was me being intellectually weak. 

You are right that Reagan nostalgia has frozen the party.  I just about puked everytime one of the Republican presidential candidates tried to cast themselves as the new Reagan in the primary debates (which is to say, every two minutes).   What they miss, of course, is that the reason everyone wants to be Reagan is because Reagan WON.  Resoundingly.  That's what everyone wants back.  So how did Reagan win?  Well, he was called the Great Communicator, so I think we'd have to say that had something to do with it.  Great candidates and political leaders mold the debate and conversation to their advantage.  That's different than explaining a policy to them, that's framing it, upending preconceived notions, and delivering a solid message in a way that's credible and genuine.  Great leaders don't just judge which way the wind is blowing and then develop their policies around that. 

Here the climate change issue is a great example: Dems are dead wrong, the science is increasingly undermining their position, in 10 years their alarmism is going to be seen as the ridiculous and hypocritical charade it is.  But then you have guys like McCain who feel they have to get on the train because they don't want to get left behind, so they have full on committed themselves to stupid policies to combat "man-made global warming" instead of standing up and getting the public to take another look at the counterarguments.   Had he done that 5 years ago, he'd be looking smarter by the day.  You're going to say that's denying the problem exists, but I beg you to take one more look at that issue: the climate may be changing but we ain't causing it. 

On other issues, at some point, you either believe in your principles or you don't.  What party moderates seem to suggest is that the times have changed so the principles should change.  Of course, we all know these are people who never cared whether or not abortion was legal, so long as it wasn't taxed.  I think social conservatives have work to do in connecting with libertarians, but the onus is not all on them.  For all these people who claim we need new ideas, there sure don't seem to be many forthcoming.  In any case, if you think conservative solutions for current issues like healthcare and education aren't out there - you just aren't paying attention.  They are out there and they are based on principles that go back to the Reagan days.  And polls often show them to be winning solutions.  Of course, maybe someone isn't communicating them very effectively, but that only proves my original point.  You are inclined to hear them and still aren't, how is anyone else going to get that message?   No conservatives are denying there are healthcare and education issues that need addressing - stop listening to the President on that.   

Sorry this is a little scattershot - I hope to organize these kinds of thoughts into posts at some point.  Maybe then it will make more sense, but you got me going today.

I disagree completely....

Submitted by KrautSA on Tue, 07/28/2009 - 12:30.

tdawg11870,

Granted I was in pre-school when the 84 election took place, but as an informed American voter I must know the policies of the past and not hang onto "yes we can"  bumper sticker slogans, as the current infomercial voters do.  I think the Reagan conservative movement is very important and is the only way out of this .  You are correct the USSR no longer exists, but lets apply that mentality to the Iran and North Korea issues and I'll guarantee the same outcome...the nations will crumble under their own repressed civilians.  If not...preemptive strike.

You are correct that the tax rates are different and so it the debt, but as the Reagan proved in the 80's and as the Heritage Foundation shows now the only way to jump start the economy is to cut taxes.  This spurs spending causing businesses to hire people instead of downsizing ultimately finding ways around their tax burnden.  Lets look at Michigan...a prime example of these same liberal policies in action. 

And your also correct.  The term pre-existing condition term didn't exist, but I know like my parents and grandparents say.  Tough sh*t, deal with it, if you can't get insurance you deal with whatever you got, because its Gods Will.  I'm so sick of this "entitilement society"  The governement doesn't owe you anything, and nor do I.  If you need help hopefully your family and church will support you and help in anyway you can.  That is the american way...work for what you get.  

Regarding the gay issue, don't even get me started.  It went from a preverse curiosity to something that is cool.  So all over you have weak and spineless individuals turning gay cause they were picked on in school and don't fit in.  We all know now that if you are in some weird preverse minority today everyone will make life easier for you, because its owed to you.  Which is BS in my book.

Lastly, I agree that there isn't a communication problem from the Republican base, its with the soft policies. We have a bunch of spineless leaders that are more afraid of offending some group than doing whats right. And the entitlement society has grown so large that the people that actually want to work hard and provide for themselves and there families are the minority so politicians run on the "free handout" platform.  I'm sick of it, and I don't care how many of the same prefabricated letters ole Mitch sends me I'll keep emailing.  Cause that what I do, because I know if I loose my job, i can depend on everyone else to put food on my table.

Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

 

That is a recipe for loss

Submitted by tdawg11870 on Tue, 07/28/2009 - 14:07.

Someone once defined insanity as doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.  Go out to the people with that message and having 40 senators will be considered "the good old days."